Quit lumping the two together! reiserfs is great. reiser4 is very different and still needs a lot of work.

yes is great in pure fs speed with tons of small files .
ISNT great for interactivity and latencies.

high cpu usage and bad/longer latencies are the same attribute of both.
main love goal is to decrese latencies and increse interactivity from this aspect both are not so good.
of course reiser4 worst than reiserfs.

dont like the idea ?

there are many other patchsets supporting reiser4 and liking reiserfs
cheers._________________ "Time is a companion that goes with us on a journey. It reminds us to cherish each moment, because it will never come again. What we leave behind is not as important as how we have lived" J-L. Picard

Quit lumping the two together! reiserfs is great. reiser4 is very different and still needs a lot of work.

For the interactivity problem pov, they are exactly the same - not the mention the fact that a number of disturbing stalls have been reported on lkml for ReiserFS.. Sorry but I can't in good conscience recommend anyone either one.

Could LIRC patch be added in new love-sources?
That would be nice!
Thanks.

and You have some working version ? this is first request for it :p
I had it in vivid-sources and some my previous love ,but this is not good to maintaining .
really is only kernel-space solution for it , any user-space solution ?
ad additional patch also maybe If You have some tested one

cheers.

I am using 2.6.12-rc2-love1 now, and lirc works for me.
Couldn't find patch for rc3 though.

still i completely agree that things like that should be kept in userspace, same as automounting etc etc
has nothing to do in kernel somehow as it is a pure user tool_________________http://proaudio.tuxfamily.org/wiki - pro-audio software overlay

still i completely agree that things like that should be kept in userspace, same as automounting etc etc
has nothing to do in kernel somehow as it is a pure user tool

Yes, this works!
Thank you, gimpel.

nice
/me forwards your "thanks" to peter and his -cko broken-out seems he did good work on it! (the lirc-config2 patch that is)_________________http://proaudio.tuxfamily.org/wiki - pro-audio software overlay

Fallow, you should just include all the logos with the kernel by default. It won't increase the download size that much, and it IS all about choice isn't it? _________________I'm not a Guru, I just ask a lot of questions.

Fallow,
What will you include in -rc4? Just curious, really liking the desktop IngoSched. Out of the 3 IngoSched options, are any of them the default scheduler for the vanilla 2.6.12 series? Also, what do you think about Staircase 11.1?_________________Viper-Sources Maintainer || nesl247 Projects || vipernicus.org blog

I applaud Lovechild and fallow for the effort, this kernel is very high quality

I second that, latest love-sources are working splendidly well here. The only thing I miss from my -cko days is the 1Gb Lowmem patch although I guess the speed boost is more psychological than anything ._________________Momo_CCCP

yes, i know. but befor i do this every kernel release i tought it would be a great idea to ask if someone else(how has to patch the kernel anyway) could do this for me .

the question is: do you not put raiser4 in the kernel because you don't like it and you think it doens't work good on an desktop - or does it realy improve the kernel(eg because it saves you much time)?

yes, i know. but befor i do this every kernel release i tought it would be a great idea to ask if someone else(how has to patch the kernel anyway) could do this for me .

the question is: do you not put raiser4 in the kernel because you don't like it and you think it doens't work good on an desktop - or does it realy improve the kernel(eg because it saves you much time)?

Things that are bad about Reiser4:

1. Its buggy.
2. Its bad for latency - against love-sources goal.
3. Did I mention that its buggy?
4. It needs stuff from -mm, which means it changes the kernel in non-trivial ways that could make a difference even if reiser4 is disabled from kernel config.
5. Oh yeah - its buggy.

yes, i know. but befor i do this every kernel release i tought it would be a great idea to ask if someone else(how has to patch the kernel anyway) could do this for me .

the question is: do you not put raiser4 in the kernel because you don't like it and you think it doens't work good on an desktop - or does it realy improve the kernel(eg because it saves you much time)?

Things that are bad about Reiser4:

1. Its buggy.
2. Its bad for latency - against love-sources goal.
3. Did I mention that its buggy?
4. It needs stuff from -mm, which means it changes the kernel in non-trivial ways that could make a difference even if reiser4 is disabled from kernel config.
5. Oh yeah - its buggy.

i think you didn't understand me. but thats maybe my fault . ok, the last try for today:

is the kernel better if you don't include the reiser4 patches in the sources, even if you disable reiser4 in your config? this question is not about how bad is reiser4.

my problem is i don't want to switch now. my reiser4 runs ok. its fast and i have no problems with it yet and i have no time and space to move all of my partitions...